Do Dems fear Marco Rubio?
That’s what they say, but …
Marco Rubio did a pretty good job in the Republican debate last week. He didn’t hurt himself in any way and when he had a chance to speak, he sounded strong and got applause.
Since then, two liberals have expressed fear of Rubio as a candidate and it seems real, not the type of fear liberals express for a weak candidate they secretly want to get the nomination.
First up is MSNBC’s Chris Matthews who claims that Rubio “terrifies” him.
Here’s what he says in the video below:
I’m sorry, I see this race going to Marco Rubio and it terrifies me. He’s the biggest hawk running, he’s a beautiful speaker, a very attractive young candidate who really knows how to spellbind. He’s the young new breath, he’s an Obama!
Watch:
Next up is CNN Democratic strategist Bakari Sellers who calls Rubio dangerous.
About a minute into this video, S.E. Cupp notes that Rubio had a good night at the debate. Sellers responds:
Marco Rubio scares me, he is a dangerous general election candidate. I mean dangerous as in, he could be the 45th president of the United States.
Watch:
Now that Scott Walker has exited the race, there’s been speculation about where his supporters will go. Marco Rubio is a likely destination.
Allahpundit of Hot Air:
I doubt Walker will endorse anytime soon — like his donors, he’s now in a position of needing to pick a winner too — but given all the nice things he’s had to say about Rubio, I’d assume he’s leaning that way. Or maybe he just won’t endorse at all and will wait for his inevitable appointment as Labor secretary by whoever the next Republican president is.
And Erick Erickson:
His donors were really, really unhappy with Walker’s staff and Walker’s performance and wanted something done.
I spent that night and the next day talking to some of Walker’s more prominent supporters. To a person, they were all for Rubio second and many of them were headed that way after Walker’s debate performance.
I suspect that will hold and many, though not all, of Walker’s donors will go with Marco Rubio next.
As Rubio said during the debate, he’s not running to retain his senate seat. Obviously, he’s in this race for the long haul.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“. . . he’s an Obama!”
____________________
Rubio has demonstrated that he can’t be trusted, so in that respect he is definitely like Obama.
I hate what he did with the Gang of Eight, but of course they fear him. He has charisma and talent on camera (unlike Scott Walker). He is also a substantive candidate.
If it were a choice of any Democrat and Rubio on our side, I would choose Rubio without hesitation (unlike Jeb which would result in me staying home in protest). Let’s see how Cruz does in the nomination process. It is still way early.
Who would be listening to your “protest”? What would be the consequence? Would it compel the primary voters “make a better choice next time” (just like all those “protest” nonvotes against Romney and McCain)?
The whole concept of “protest” nonvotes is self-indulgent and often irrational.
I don’t like Jeb, but he wouldn’t be as completely wrong as any Democrat. If the only thing I can do is help stop the greater of two evils, it would be morally irresponsible not to do it.
actually, between these, two there isn’t a “lesser evil”.
I cannot fathom why so many supposedly intelligent, conservative voters believe the myth of any GOP member being better than any Democrat.
Look at Boehner or McConnell, then tell me things were any worse than with Reid or Pelosi.
It is utterly foolish to believe that a crook is any less crooked simply by merit of the little letter after their name.
I also will stay home if my “choice” ends up being between Cankles and Shemp Bush.
Rev 3:16 But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, not hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth.
I would rather have neither. A weak ally who won’t hold the line and lock shields is worthless. Literally worthless all he does is allow a weak spot to let the enemy in and roll up your line.
amnesty loving RINO… the perfect GOPe candidate.
no wonder the Demonrats like him.
I’m sorry, I see this race going to Marco Rubio and it terrifies me.
He’s the young new breath, he’s an Obama!
Wait. I thought Matthews said Obama sent a thrill up his leg? So, why does the thought of Rubio winning terrify him? Does Hillary terrify him, too?
That’s an objective journalist right there, folks. [sarcftsc]
I miss the old days when anchormen very clearly delineated the editorial portion of their newscast – at least then they pretended to present the news objectively ~
He’s not nor does he pretend to be a journalist; he’s a commentator, like Hannity and O’Reilly.
And nobody takes him seriously, certainly not millennial Liberals who denigrate him as blatantly as the mad dog Conservatives here disparage RINOs.
I’m sure his pal schmucky Schumer would like us to believe dems are afraid of Rubio.
Dems fear him because he is actually one of them pretending to be a Republican.
What don’t the GOP Establishment types and their beltway media bullies understand about stopping illegal immigration, strengthening the military, supporting Israel, and stopping islamofascism?
Amazing. All the Republicans get called out as RINOs, except for the actual RINO in this race. I see Astroturf.
Rubio is a puppet of the GOP Establishment, the RNC, and the US Chamber of Commerce, who are all aligned (and for whom the RNC changed the nominating rules to make it all but impossible for outsiders to advance. The splitting tactic of having so many candidates now was to ultimately push the Jeb “Make America Mexico Again” Bush, sock-puppet of the Chamber of Commerce, and as the other candidates drop out, they will pledge their support to Jeb, or at least not to Trump, as Walker so ungraciously sneered as he took his ball and went home.
No, they do not fear him. They feared Scott Walker, and right now are thrilled that they have dodged a bullet.
The 1% bullet?
It bothers me to no end that news commenters are still calling Fiorina’s Planned Parenthood statement false. It’s right there on the internet in several places. In less than 15 minutes you can find it and see what she said was true.
Balony. The original videos are propaganda based on editing tricks.
Carly’s statement at the debate and her follow up web site video are lies based on lies.
The fetus in the video was NOT filmed at a Planned Parenthood clinic
The fetus in the video did not have a beating heart.
The voice talking about the beating heart, etc has NOTHING to do with the fetus shown on the video. It is a stock video provided by a different anti abortion group, from an event that has nothing to do with Planned Parenthood..
Further the photo displayed at the video’s nine-minute mark isn’t an aborted fetus at all. It’s actually a stillborn fetus prematurely delivered at 19 weeks.
The woman who took that photo of her stillborn child initially published it on her blog — but the Center for Medical Progress, the anti abortion group who made the heavily edited films, used the photo without her permission.
Here’s more on the stillborn fetus.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2542212/Mother-shares-heartbreaking-photos-baby-miscarried-19-weeks.html
The fetus photos and film clips from the CMP propaganda videos were spliced into the narrative, with dialog over them, to give the false impression they were filmed live at a Planned Parenthood facility.
The video at Carly’s website was altered to fit her incorrect narrative at the debate.
she’s a lying scuzbucket. She lied about her failures at HP, she lied about breaking the embargo and selling printers to Iran, and now she’s lying about Planned Parenthood.
Rubio boosterism at LI.
Please show the data or substantial argument why Rubio is more electable than any other candidate. What’s here: a semi-hysterical quote from the great Leftist political seer Chris Matthews; a retreaded comment about Rubio’s debate performance from RINO SE Cupp; a speculation about who Walker would endorse from RINO site HotGas, and further speculation from Erick Erickson about where Walker’s supporters will go. Finally, a concluding statement sure to stun — that Rubio is in it for the long haul. And which candidate doesn’t think he’s in it for “the long haul? Walker surely did.
Rubio boosterism at LI.
If you haven’t informed the people at LI which candidate(s) meet your approval for “boosterism”, you really should do that, so they won’t waste our time covering unapproved candidates.
lol 🙂
Boosterism is great so boost who you wish. Let’s just be clear about it. For myself, I’m boosting the collapse of the GOPe. I see this as essential to the survival of the republic (nevermind the party). The stakes are that high. We won’t survive another complaisant, progressively co-opted, PC-subservient republican.
In other words: “This article says nothing about the greatness of Trump! For shame!”
Quite an inference. I’m not necessarily a Trump supporter. I’m a supporter of the best anti-establishment candidate. And I’m a supporter of Trump’s voice and what he represents. As I see it, this group of anti-establishment candidates include Carson, Cruz and Trump.
Back to Rubio and the issue of “fear.” It is true that the Left telegraphs its fear. But it doesn’t do so by saying “I’m afraid of X.” It does so with frenzied hatred and calumny. To wit, Reagan, Pain and Breitbart. We must understand the Left as a large tribe of savage children. I assert this as a former Leftist. The Left is not capable of processing or responding to threatening or challenging information rationally. This is why the 30 scientists recently called on Obama to prosecute and imprison climate-change skeptics. It is why the college-educated Bill Ayers called for rounding up millions of wealthy capitalists for re-education and even slaughter. So the idea of Leftists coolly discussing their fear of Marco Rubio is simply surreal, or unreal.
I would support Marco Rubio if I thought he was a stealth reformer. That is, somebody who gave lips service to establishment conventions but held deeper reformist intentions. But Rubio is actually the opposite. He’s a stealth subverter of conservatism. The first thing he did as senator was stealthily align with democrats to pass a stealth amnesty. He uses his glibness (or “articulateness”) to advance himself and undermine reformist conservatism. He’s the archetypal weasel politician.
Here. Here!
Where? Where?
Why right here, of course.
~whoosh~
You asked, I answered.
I’ve noted the appearance of a couple of puff pieces advancing the campaign of similar candidates in prior election cycles here at LI. Go-along/ get-along, open borders, Hispanic GOP water boy, Carlos Curbello (R-FL)is the most recent example that comes to mind right now. Disappointing that there isn’t a more astute vetting of the source(s). OTOH, such articles do afford open debate and refutation of content.
“Hispanic water boy?” Really?
Anyway, Curbelo managed to successfully flip the 26th district, which went for Obama in 2012, from Blue to Red, away from Joe Garcia. Do you really think Mac MacDougall could have accomplished that? Or are you one of those who, if you can’t seat your idea of the “perfect” Republican in some given district, would rather see a Democrat get (or keep) it?
I’m seriously curious as to how you think LI should have covered that race differently.
Rubio is young and good looking, which appeals to the vapid youth vote and a surprising number of folk who should know better. Rubio is probably the single best candidate currently running at promoting an ideal. Rubio is Hispanic, which not only appeals to some Hispanics, but also appeals to a variety of others. In spite of his well-known and well-deserved warts, Rubio has one of the most conservative voting records in the Senate.
Rubio is not my first or second choice, but I’ll vote for him without feeling sick about it. I think that the deep resentment toward him for his Schumer misjudgement is somewhat isolated within the HIVs in the political blogosphere.
“Schumer misjudgment”? Is that like the atomic cherry bomb?
Do Dems fear Rubio? Not as much as do conservatives.
Rubio was just recently the deciding 60th vote in the Senate for Obamatrade, giving the President fast track authority over trade treaties and immigration.
He didn’t even read the bill!
Seriously, acess to the Obamatrade bill was made available only to Senators, not to staff, and they were not allowed to make copies of the bill. Under these conditions, no Senator, & certainly no Republican Senator should have voted for the bill. (And the logs that show who viewed the bill don’t show Rubio. He didn’t read the bill).
Rubio was a bought sellout when we went in with Shumer’s amnesty bill, and he’s still a sellout today.
In Florida, where I live, Rubio was a Jeb Bush crony & a rubber stamp for Jeb Bush in the state Senate. I view him as essentially the same thing as Jeb Bush, just with different backers.
I suspect that we’re seeing the old “I don’t know anybody who voted for Nixon” effect.
Those in thrall to the Dem platform find Rubio appealing, and can imagining themselves voting for him if he didn’t have an “R” after his name. And they can imagine others—even Democrats—voting for him. And that makes him an electoral threat to the Dem program of world domination.
But they can’t imagine the same for the other Repub candidates. Trump and Cruz, even Carson and Fiorina, are visitors from some other planet; they probably can’t even hear what these candidates are saying over all the cognitive dissonance. Surely nobody on Planet Earth could vote for those people …
So he’s a threat to those who hope that all liberals, progressives, race-baiters and socialists will automatically vote for a Dem candidate.
But the same factors determine that Rubio will not make a dent in any conservative vote.
You’ve just classified me as being “in thrall to the Dem platform” because I can “see myself voting for Rubio.” That’s insulting and ignorant. I have been a conservative my entire life, served my country in the Armed Forces, have NEVER voted for a Democrat in any election at any level. I am not, however, a single issue voter, and I’m old enough and smart enough to know that Trump is leap of faith that requires one to accept a great deal of risk. I’ll do it before I’ll stay home and see Clinton in the Whitehouse, but not by much.
Dems do not fear Rubio.
They know that he is either naive (and can be rolled, if elected) or deceitful (and has the same goals as the Dems, or who at best will “manage the decline” of the U.S. as Dem policies continue to be enacted)
Rubio is naive if he truly thought he could manage the Gang of 8 amnesty deal with Schumer. And he is deceitful if he wasn’t trying to do what’s best for the U.S. (i.e. NOT amnesty).
Either way – naive or deceitful – the Dems would be fine with Rubio.
If it came down to Rubio vs. Trump, I’d choose Rubio. Though if it came down to Jeb! vs. Trump, I’d probably hold my nose and choose Trump. It’s still so long to go till Florida’s primary, though, that anything could still happen.
“It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.” 😉
“…I’d probably hold my nose and choose Trump”
Wow Amy, quite an admission. 🙂
It’s all about choosing the lesser of two weevils 😉
I don’t know if Democrats are afraid of Little Marco, but illegal aliens certainly aren’t.